Radio DelEuZe: that a way

27.8.10

that a way

________________

we could speak of the sons of Deleuze

in the way we speak of the sons of poets as in the sons of Jonson the sons of Ben

the tribe of Jonson

the poet Ben Jonson Shakespeare's confrere

and the brothers of Guattari _

and because of the youthful energy of Felix we could speak of brothers flying electrical horizontal lightening ~ because of his beauty his love his action

his fiery eyes

and his quickly ever moving

and if they could not understand this we 'd know they are

stupid and struck dumb and deaf in the old biblical sense....

they are dumb not to know love. ...

and this would be love the fire fusing and fortuning the two

showing us an example of how to work

to create

_____________ these are mysteries and secrets ~

__________AnD What I most detested was Hegelianism and dialectics.

_____

__________AnD

What I most detested was Hegelianism and dialectics.

And : The question of speed is important and also very complex. It doesn't mean the first in the race: you can be late through speed. Speed is to be caught in a becoming_ which is not a development or an evolution. One must be like a taxi, queue(ligne d'attente), line of flight, traffic jam, bottleneck, green and red lights, slightly paranoid,brushes with the police. To be an abstract and broken line, a zigzag which glides 'between'. The grass and speed. What you misnamed style just now_ charm or style_ is speed.

And :One only discovers worlds through a long, broken flight.

_AnD______as_______for___

As for the method of deconstruction of texts I see clearly what it is, I admire it a lot, but it has nothing to do with my own method. I do not present myself as a commentator on texts.

For me, a text is merely a small cog in an extra-textual practice. It is not a question of commenting on the text by a method of deconstruction, or by a method of textual practice, or by other methods; it is a question of what use it has in an extra-textual practice that prolongs the text ..

Professor D Challanger speaking

in Clinical Critical terms as the hat was in the wind

How else?

How else can one write of those things which one doesn't know, or knows badly? It is precisely here that we imagine having something to say. We write only at the frontiers of our knowledge, at the border which separates our knowledge from our ignorance and transforms the one to the other.
Only in this manner are we resolved to write. To satisfy ignorance is to put off writing until tomorrow -or rather, to make it impossible. Perhaps writing was a relation to silence altogether more threatening that that, which is supposed to entertain with death.
_______________________

Difference and Repetition.